From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751599Ab3EYGTJ (ORCPT ); Sat, 25 May 2013 02:19:09 -0400 Received: from mail-ea0-f178.google.com ([209.85.215.178]:42608 "EHLO mail-ea0-f178.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750862Ab3EYGTH (ORCPT ); Sat, 25 May 2013 02:19:07 -0400 Message-ID: <51A057CF.5070605@redhat.com> Date: Sat, 25 May 2013 08:18:55 +0200 From: Paolo Bonzini User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130514 Thunderbird/17.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: James Bottomley CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tj@kernel.org, FUJITA Tomonori , Doug Gilbert , linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, Jens Axboe Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 part1 1/4] sg_io: pass request_queue to blk_verify_command References: <1369317503-4095-1-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com> <1369317503-4095-2-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com> <1369380965.1945.10.camel@dabdike> <519F1A28.6080303@redhat.com> <1369381857.1945.15.camel@dabdike> <519F1C7A.2030605@redhat.com> <1369382613.1945.19.camel@dabdike> <519F2597.9030208@redhat.com> <1369455247.1893.2.camel@dabdike> In-Reply-To: <1369455247.1893.2.camel@dabdike> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Il 25/05/2013 06:14, James Bottomley ha scritto: > On Fri, 2013-05-24 at 10:32 +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> Il 24/05/2013 10:03, James Bottomley ha scritto: >>>>>>>>>>> Does anyone in the real world actually care about this bug? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Yes, or I would move on and not waste so much time on this. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Fine, so produce a simple fix for this bug which we can discuss that's >>>>>>> not tied to this feature. >>>>> >>>>> Honestly, I have no idea how this is even possible. >>> Really? It looks to me like a simple block on the commands for disk >>> devices in the opcode switch would do it (with a corresponding change to >>> sg.c:sg_allow_access). >> >> Which switch? What I can do is something like this in blk_verify_command: > > not in blk_verify_command: outside of it, in the three places it's used. In other words, if (blk_verify_command(...) || blk_verify_command_with_queue(q, ...)) We must have different taste. Paolo